Post-Hall Appeals From Pre-Hall Judgments

In 2018’s Hall v. Hall, the Supreme Court held that actions consolidated with other actions retain their independent character. So the resolution of one action is final and appealable, regardless of whether the other actions remain pending. Hall left some unanswered questions. Among them was what would become of pre-Hall judgments that were not immediately appealable under then-applicable circuit law. Before Hall, several circuits held that a judgment in a single action was not final until all consolidated actions were resolved. Hall seemed to make those judgments final and appealable on the day they were entered. And that sudden finality could make any post-Hall attempts to appeal untimely.

Last week saw the first appeal (to my knowledge) to involve this question. In Haynes v. World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc., the Second Circuit dismissed as untimely most of the appeals from five actions that had been consolidated in the district court. Before Hall—and relying on circuit law that Hall later abrogated—the Second Circuit had dismissed as premature appeals from two of those actions. The plaintiffs then waited until all five actions were resolved before again trying to appeal. The intervening decision in Hall meant that the appeals in four of those five actions were too late.

Notably, the Second Circuit did not definitively resolve how to deal with appeals from pre-Hall judgments. The decision is unpublished and thus non-precedential. And the plaintiffs appear to have forfeited any argument that Hall didn’t require the dismissal of the appeals. So we’ll have to wait for a definitive answer on how parties can appeal pre-Hall judgments, if they can at all.

The First Haynes Appeal

Simplifying a bit, Haynes involved five purported class actions brought against World Wrestling Entertainment. The plaintiffs were former WWE performers who alleged that they suffered neurological damage (as well as other physical and mental injuries) while working for the WWE. Although brought in district courts across the country, all of the suits were eventually consolidated in the District of Connecticut.

In 2016, the district court dismissed all of the claims in two of the actions. The plaintiffs in those actions then tried to appeal. But the Second Circuit held that these appeals were premature. At that time, the law of the Second Circuit provided a strong presumption that all actions in consolidated proceedings must be resolved before any of those actions is final and appealable. Because the district court had resolved only two of the consolidated actions, the plaintiffs’ appeals were premature. The Second Circuit accordingly dismissed the appeals “without prejudice to renewal of the[] appeals upon entry of a final judgment in the District Court disposing of all the cases with which [the appealed] cases have been consolidated.”

The Supreme Court’s Decision in Hall

About a year and a half later, the Supreme Court decided Hall v. Hall. The Court held that consolidated actions retain their independent nature. So the resolution of a single action that was consolidated with others is a final, appealable decision, regardless of whether the other actions remain pending. The time for appealing that action runs from its resolution, not from the resolution of all consolidated actions. Litigants can—indeed, must—immediately appeal the resolution of that action and cannot wait until the end of the consolidated proceedings. Hall thus abrogated the Second Circuit’s law on appeals in consolidated actions.

The Second Haynes Appeal

Meanwhile, the consolidated proceedings in Haynes continued in the district court. By September 2018—about six months after the Supreme Court decided Hall—the district court had dismissed all five actions. The plaintiffs then appealed filed notices of appeal in all five actions.

The Second Circuit held that it lacked jurisdiction over four of the five appeals. Hall meant that each of the consolidated actions was final and appealable once the district court resolved all of the claims in that action. The plaintiffs then had 30 days to appeal. In four of the five actions, the notices of appeal were filed well outside that 30-day window. In the fifth action (which was timely appealed), the Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claims.

What to Do With Pre-Hall Judgments

Although Haynes deemed four of the five appeals untimely under Hall, the court did not settle what must be done with pre-Hall judgments. For one thing, the case is unpublished and thus non-precedential. It also appears that the plaintiffs forfeited any argument that Hall didn’t require dismissing their appeals. The opinion noted that the plaintiffs in these four appeals did not seek any relief from the Second Circuit or the district court after Hall was decided. “This inaction,” the Second Circuit explained, “was fatal.” Further, the plaintiffs had not made any argument that Hall did not apply or that some “work-around” existed to avoid the untimeliness of their appeals.

Had the plaintiffs preserved this issue, it’s not clear what the Second Circuit should have done. There are several ways this issue could shake out. For example, you could deem all pre-Hall judgments retroactively final, with the appeal deadline running from the entry of those judgments. In circuits that deemed these judgments non-final before Hall, that might mean a lot of suddenly time-barred appeals. Or you could deem all pre-Hall judgments retroactively final but allow parties to reopen the mandates in any pre-Hall appeals. This rule would have saved the plaintiffs in Haynes that had appealed before Hall was decided, but it would leave out anyone who (perhaps in reliance on then-applicable circuit law) did not appeal before Hall. A third option would be to deem all pre-Hall judgments final as of the day Hall was decided. In circuits whose law was abrogated by Hall, the time to appeal any pre-Hall judgments would run from the date of the Supreme Court’s decision, regardless of how long ago the district court entered the judgment.

I haven’t given this a ton of thought, but the first two options seem the most straightforward under current understandings of jurisdiction and finality. The first two options are also harsh. They might leave those who relied on pre-Hall circuit law with no appeal. The third option—deeming all pre-Hall judgments in consolidated actions final on the day Hall was decided—thus seems the most equitable.

One last thought. Given that Haynes is, to my knowledge, the first appeal to involve this issue in the two-plus years since Hall, perhaps this isn’t much of an issue. We’ll see if it crops up again in the future.

Haynes v. World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc., 2020 WL 5406410 (2d Cir. Sep. 9, 2020), available at CourtListener and Westlaw.